A leftist’s opinion: Not ‘Not My President’

President Donald Trump’s eighth month in the presidency is ending soon, marking eight months of an America more divided than ever. In our increasingly-PC world, there is less and less room for people to speak their minds lest they be slaughtered by others for not being politically correct.

Trump’s extremely anti-PC attitude has led many to dislike him, with some believing that they cannot support a president who runs against those attitudes. Of course, it is totally acceptable to not like someone; the point of this article is not to say that we should all love and adore President Trump. The article’s point is to cut out unnecessary argumentation and explain why we shouldn’t be caught up in a perceived revolution, but should be attempting to work with him.

The left went wild when Trump won the presidency, with a popular movement rising up with a curious slogan: “Not My President.” The idea is simple; those who side with the movement refuse to accept President Trump as the president.

I am a Democrat; I am an advocate for racial minorities, the LGBTQ+ community, and feminists. I believe in pro-choice and I believe that black lives do indeed matter. But despite my prejudices against President Trump and the extreme differences in our beliefs, I attest that the “Not My President” movement is simply childish.

The “Not My President” movement ignores the fundamental definition of the President of the United States, regardless of your political beliefs. He may not have won the popular vote, but then again former President George W. Bush did not win the popular vote. In fact, Bush’s fallout of not winning the popular vote was more drastic than 2016’s election; President Trump did not have to go through a recount. He did not have to go through a “Trump vs. Clinton,” something Bush did have to go through in order to successfully claim his presidency. However, people still accept Bush wholeheartedly as one of our former presidents, despite his own problems. Why is it then that we refuse to accept Trump?

It could be that the left wants to simply get its point across. To the left, the fact that Trump managed to get the presidency even though he had lost the popular vote must equate to him being illegitimate. It could also be that his viewpoints are just too out of shape for the left, that Trump’s views are too conservative. Regardless, it stands that he is our president; even if the popular vote had been lost, his victory through the Electoral College was ultimately fair; we may not like it, but that’s how it is.

Perhaps huge protests in the very first couple of days of the presidency may have been able to change something. If enough had near-revolted, maybe the government might have had a chance of being persuaded. But as it stands, Donald Trump is still our 45th president, and unless he commits a crime that gets him impeached, it is safe to say he will be our president for three-and-a-half more years.

The intellectual discourse thus should not be about whether or not Trump’s presidency is legitimate, but on how we can best work with him. Trump has done a lot in the last six months; the undoing of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the Muslim travel ban, and the dismissal of former FBI Director James Comey. If we could do anything as not just liberals or conservatives, but Americans, it would be to work with President Trump to attempt and keep America stable.

This is our country, and we have to keep it afloat. Refusing to assist America because you disagree with the president won’t help America or make the president disappear; it’ll only make life harder for everyone.

A common argument of the right side is that leftists are too hypocritical; according to them, the left refuses to view racist comments towards white people as racist, makes blatant sexist statements against men while supporting equality, and simply does not want to help America through cooperation with the president. It is not this article’s job to prove or disprove most of these accusations; it is instead for the article to state that working with the president, not working against him, will benefit America as a whole.

2 Comments

“The intellectual discourse thus should not be about whether or not Trump’s presidency is legitimate, but on how we can best work with him. Trump has done a lot in the last six months; the undoing of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the Muslim travel ban, and the dismissal of former FBI Director James Comey. If we could do anything as not just liberals or conservatives, but Americans, it would be to work with President Trump to attempt [to] keep America stable.

This is our country, and we have to keep it afloat. Refusing to assist America because you disagree with the president won’t help America or make the president disappear; it’ll only make life harder for everyone.”

How exactly would working with Trump benefit America as a whole?
And how exactly does working against him make life harder for everyone?

If anything, movements opposing Trump’s actions(not just the legitimacy of his presidency) have reduced a great deal of damage.

For example: In your article you mentioned Trump’s Muslim ban, which has been considered to be one of his boldest(or disastrous, depending on your view) moves since entering office. However, if not for the actions of the ACLU & other civil rights organizations, activists, and in general those who opposed Trump’s actions(the very people who you insist cooperate with him) then many individuals coming into the US from the seven targeted countries would have been barred, deported, or detained. If not for the actions of people who disagreed with Trump, we would be facing a complete ban on immigrants/refugees coming in from the blacklisted countries instead of a 90-120 day ban. Which, I think you’d agree would be pretty terrible and fail to benefit the US in any way.

I’m not trying to call out the legitimacy of your political stance or anything, but I just can’t wrap my head around why someone as progressive as yourself would insist that we work with Trump, a person whose actions would be causing a greater deal of harm had it not been for activists opposing him. It seem very clear that working with the president isn’t going to accomplish much.

You raise a good point. What I was attempting to point out wasn’t to side with him, but to try and work towards a middle ground. President Trump has been shown over and over again to refuse to consider 100% following the agenda of a group that believes other than what he believes in. I was stating that we should be attempting to work towards trying to get him to compromise. I also understand your point on the ACLU. I was simply trying to point out that stating “Not My President” and refusing to encourage discourse at ALL could bode not that well for leftists and other peoples’ opinions of them.

When we promote necessary conflicts against Trump such as what the ACLU has done, I fully support and understand. However, when people make arguments that make no sense, when people resort to emotional argumentation instead of logical discourse, and when people state “Not My President” without attempting to compromise, I feel it would make for an unnecessary conflict. I understand where you’re coming from, though.

Join the HS Insider Newsletter!

Sections

About HS Insider

High School Insider enables students to post their stories on LATimes.com and report on issues that matter to them and their communities. Through HS Insider, students are provided the opportunity to join a network of more than 300 schools, attend conferences, apply for internships and reach thousands with their reporting. Interested in getting involved? Send an email to Molly.Heber@latimes.com.